Joe Rogan Podcast

[Zainjal26]

 

[Lee And His Sneaks]

 

[1995]

Mike Cernovich

Mike Cernovich rose to prominence on the back of his male supremacist rhetoric before latching on to the racist and misogynistic so-called “alt-right.” He has since distanced himself from the "alt-right" after it became a liability for his brand, but still embodies its informational style, as...

www.splcenter.org

Not a good look

 

[RustyShackleford]

Like I said, you are pathetic at this

You are posting out-of-context memes by alt-righters to defend Joe Rogan.

You want to take issue with Biden using the n-word in 1985, go ahead. But let us look at the context in he said it...

Did Biden Use Racial Slurs in the Senate?

Social media users twisted Biden's words from a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in 1985 by omitting their context.

www.snopes.com

It’s true that Biden said the words captured above during the course of a U.S. Senate hearing, but the presentations seen here omit the crucial context that Biden was expressing neither his own words nor his own thoughts.

On June 5, 1985, Biden — who was then a U.S. Senator representing Delaware and a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee — was questioning William Bradford Reynolds, the assistant U.S. attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, who had recently been nominated by President Ronald Reagan for promotion to associate attorney general.

Biden opposed Reynolds’ nomination on the grounds that Reynolds “had pursued a conservative political agenda and had shown contempt for civil rights laws,” particularly by opposing a redistricting plan (i.e., the “Nunez plan”) that would have eliminated gerrymandering to create a majority Black congressional district in Louisiana, and by ignoring racist comments issued by the state’s lawmakers.

During a committee hearing on Reynolds’ nomination, Biden pointed out that Reynolds had approved a redistricting plan that favored Republicans over the state’s Black residents, and that Reynolds had been made aware, via a memo from his staff, that legislators who opposed the Nunez plan had engaged in making racially disparaging comments. It was in that context, then, that Biden confronted Reynolds by reading out loud portions of the memo detailing racial slurs used by Louisiana legislators: “[Your staff] brought to your attention the allegation that important legislators in defeating the Nunez plan, in the basement, said, ‘We already have a n—– mayor [in New Orleans], we don’t need any more n—– big shots.’”

Biden’s point was that those comments, among other evidence, should have alerted Reynolds to issues with approving the Louisiana governor’s redistricting plan over the so-called Nunez plan. Biden’s efforts in opposing Reynolds were successful, as the Senate Judiciary Committee ultimately rejected his nomination for promotion.

Joe Biden did some ****ed up **** that was vile and I have to curse his name for doing it. There is a ton of things from his past to be mad about. Busing, tough on crime, Anita Hill, etc.

But in this instance, he was trying to protect black people's civil rights. He was quoting people that were trying to delude to the voting power of black southerners. Ronald Regan, a without question racist, was trying to sabotage the civil rights division of the DOJ

So the dumb-*** meme is arguing that Joe Biden using the n-word in 1985 in an attempt to defend black people's civil rights in deserves the same level of outrage as Joe Rogan using it to whine about white people not being able to say it in the 2010s.

And you felt that was worth posting

Give me my rep, and put some god damn effort into your struggle caping

Even Joe Rogan deserves better than this

 

[RustyShackleford]

Mike Cernovich

Mike Cernovich rose to prominence on the back of his male supremacist rhetoric before latching on to the racist and misogynistic so-called “alt-right.” He has since distanced himself from the "alt-right" after it became a liability for his brand, but still embodies its informational style, as...

www.splcenter.org

Not a good look

Dude is exposing him a little more every time he post

 

[shogun]

Tonight the ufc did a bhm segment during their event. Think rogan is commentating next week and hope he does the intro for the next segment.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Content discovery matters. If you get delisted by a search engine, you're still on the Internet and theoretically accessible to all, but far more difficult for end users to find.

it's far easier to discover content on the open web
than it is locked into a premium streaming apps.

he's not going to be delisted from search engines, his content is still on youtube in short clips.
leaving spotify would increase his reach.

In theory, Bill O'Reilly would be "available to more people not less" after getting cut loose by Fox News. How's that working out? He's giving "lectures" to empty seats in Tampa Bay.

Bill O'reilly audience is audience is old boomers people who primarily watch television.
removing him from television is effective. the audience will have a much harder time finding him.

The JRE is a web native media product,
moving from spotify to the open web is not going to significantly impact his reach,

and this example is instructive.

has the banning of Bill O'reilly resulted in less misinformation?
Tucker Carlson occupies his time slot currently. do you think he's an upgrade from bill?

O'reilly was at least willing to offer condemnations of explicit white supremacy.
meanwhile Tucker is espousing replacement theory.

I don't see how this example is a positive case for banning.

If this boycott is such a non-threat to artistic expression, why are you so upset about it in the first place?

because it allows people to cosplay as fighting white supremacy while doing nothing actually substantive.
and further instantiates a culture around speech and expression, that makes it harder to produce compelling art. (something ill admit i care about much more than most people)

its a non threat to rogan, but I think it creates a chilling effect for 99.9% of people less powerful than Rogan.

The stated goal for boycotting artists isn't to purge Joe Rogan from the universe; it's to stop doing business with a company that actively bankrolls medical misinformation and/or White Nationalist hate speech.

okay fair enough, but I think im allowed to look at their actions with a jaundice eyes.

This seems to be the real issue for you: resentment of "rich celebrities and cultural elites" flexing their power.
Everything else feels kind of like an ad hoc justification on your part.

i dunno I think this stuff is bad,

and as a black person ill be honest I do resent that people,
especially white people but people in general, spend so much time and energy pursuing these ineffectual culture war beefs

it feels like accusations of racism and sexism ect have become an intra white battle,
that has become further and further removed from helping anyone.

and black people get used as cudgels to wield against ideological opponents.

it im resentful of anything, it's that.

Aside from our own personal posts, we're not directly involved in the production of individual user content in the way that Spotify is for its exclusive flagship podcast.

A more analogous situation would be if NikeTalk's official podcast were hosted by Ninjahood, blco02, and IntheHeilway, and my response to the clear disconnect between its content and our stated values was, "well, we believe in artistic expression. It's not my place to decide what's appropriate for the NikeTalk podcast."

I agree its not the same,
the point im making is progressive have argued for a long time the publish-platform thing
is a way to avoid accountability.

and it if someone assembled of supercut of the worst NT posts,
that express racists sexist opinions and tried to use that as a pretext to shut down NT.

and you respond with "well im a platform not a publisher"
Im sure they would say the same thing to you they say to Zuck, the Twitter guy ect
you're using that as a cover to escape accountability.

Go back and listen to what cost Don Imus his job. Compare it to the supercuts of Rogan's racism going around right now, and see if you're still inclined to argue that Imus deserved to lose his job and Rogan doesn't.

As far as I'm aware, none of the artists we're alluding to here have called for Rogan to be jailed. On a certain level, this is about workplace conduct. Would you want to work with a company whose culture not only tolerates, but abets conduct like Joe Rogan's?

If goal is some type of cosmic HR manager justice I guess sure, if rogan was working at dunder mifflin or something yes fire him.
I just figured the goal was combating racism or white supremacy,
that's lens I was analyzing this through.

I find it odd that you seem to think that boycotting musicians are "elite actors", yet the stoner with the $100 million podcast deal is just some poor schlub who's getting bullied by Hollywood and not, himself, an "elite actor" who's routinely getting away with behavior that few ordinary people could in their place of business. This is a guy who's failed up his entire life and is now weaponizing his ignorance, to the detriment of millions. He practically epitomizes privilege, and your grievance is with India Arie?!

Your definition of "elite" is, itself, a double standard which, ironically, limits how you believe someone so-labeled ought to exercise their freedoms of speech and association.

Joe Rogan is an elite, that's why he can't be cancelled.

his audience is non elites, with non elite sensibilities,
who enjoy and consume his content for various reasons, some good some bad.
and a comparatively smaller group of much richer people want force them to adopt their values.

my beef is not so much with the artists in the specific
my beef is the creation of a culture that substitutes symbolic fights, for substantive ones.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

How old were you in 2007?

i was in high school, i dunno, maybe because i was in canada, wasn't really keeping track of CBS shock jocks.

I remember a PTI segment about it.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Joe Rogan is an elite, that's why he can't be cancelled.

his audience is non elites, with non elite sensibilities,
who enjoy and consume his content for various reasons, some good some bad.
and a comparatively smaller group of much richer people want force them to adopt their values.

my beef is not so much with the artists in the specific
my beef is the creation of a culture that substitutes symbolic fights, for substantive ones.

Do you have an issue then with Joe Rogan the elite using his platform to undermine substantive fights?

Because he pushes arguments against welfare and civil rights policies and calls the people pushing them bad actors, and invites guess on routinely to talk against them.

And has done so for years

 

[osh kosh bosh]

The principle is to give the most accurate information that you have at the time you make a statement. The thing about catastrophes/crises is that such information is affected by the ongoing investigations that happen at the same time the crisis is being responded to.

Ideally, they could just say "no comment until we get solid answers." The problem with that approach is that they risk driving up the sense of panic (people were stocking up on toilet paper), which will make the country more unmanageable and the crisis harder to solve.
In practice, they have to strike the balance between informing the public and keep the population calm, and that means telling people "you can do X/you can't do Y" today, with the understanding that those instructions may no longer be valid the next hour/day/week if the most up-to-date findings suggest otherwise.

im confused

So the principle is NO misinformation

UNLESS
an elite actor that you like, in their infinite wisdom
has decided that the public is simply too stupid to handle the information?



you don't see how problematic this is?

and I think it's this kind of attitude that has caused many public health officials
to perform so poorly during this pandemic.

 

[1995]

Does banning extremists online work? It depends.

Social media bans can make it harder to recruit new followers, but existing supporters can become more toxic.

www.vox.com

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Do you have an issue then with Joe Rogan the elite using his platform to undermine substantive fights?

Because he pushes arguments against welfare and civil rights policies and calls the people pushing them bad actors. And has done so for years

I think that stuff is very bad and I wish he wouldn't do it.

Fox News does this, in a far more effective and mass scale way.
Sinclair does this.
Ben Shapiro does this.

As dismayed as I am by the fact that millions of people enjoy this content
banning these people doesn't make it go away.

suppression just leads to a lot of negative unintended consequences.

 

[Zainjal26]

Mike Cernovich

Mike Cernovich rose to prominence on the back of his male supremacist rhetoric before latching on to the racist and misogynistic so-called “alt-right.” He has since distanced himself from the "alt-right" after it became a liability for his brand, but still embodies its informational style, as...

www.splcenter.org

Not a good look

Woah
My bad.
I just love when rusty replies

 

[IATT]

 

[atxhitter03]

Im lost
He said racist stuff ? Or misinfo about covid?

 

[IATT]

Im lost
He said racist stuff ? Or misinfo about covid?

both

 

[atxhitter03]

What he say

 

[IATT]

What he say

 

[dman14]

Dwayne Johnson walks back Joe Rogan support, 'educated to his complete narrative' after N-word video

It can’t be a good thing for Joe Rogan that he’s lost the public support of one of Hollywood’s biggest stars.

mmajunkie.usatoday.com

Rock aint trying to get too attached to Joe. he got movies and tequila to sell

 

[RustyShackleford]

I think that stuff is very bad and I wish he wouldn't do it.

Even with your explanations, it is will weird to me that this is the strongest level of rebuke you ever muster for people like Rogan.

Yet you seemingly have an infinite about of smoke for someone that has done way less than him. In this case, a couple of musicians that pulled their music from Spotify

I mean you went off over a Tweet, but here you are agreeing that Rogan is doing exactly what you claim pisses you off and want to argue against

And this is all you got

Fox News does this, in a far more effective and mass scale way.
Sinclair does this.
Ben Shapiro does this.

Yeah, and?

All these people are bad, the country would be better if they didn't exist.

But I have to live in a world where they do and challenge them

But their existence doesn't negate Rogan's actions in any way.

The fact that he can make people believe that he is this non-political centrist while he peddles nonsense to millions is a unique problem. Worth calling out and drawing attention to. And look what it took for Spotify to finally do the bare minium in regards to him

Look at what you were saying about just months ago....

Not that many people fall neatly on the left right divide.

Joe Rogan strikes me as a pretty run of the mill cross pressured male voter.
whose hedge podge of political opinions don't really line up in a logical way on the left right spectrum.

regular non-political people make stupid/irrational voting decisions based on their vague judgments about politicians personalities all the time.

Joe Rogan just has the most popular podcast in the world while he does it.

He was peddling blatantly covid conspiracies and bragging about it, he had a long record of racism that had already been called out in this thread.

Yet this has made aware to you and your response has basically been: yeah it is bad, I don't agree....but the real issue is not going on his show, or not seeing how talented he is, or coming at you for enjoying some of his content, or musicians for trying to silence him, or circling back to repurposing the same arguments I was making in the Chapelle so about these elites trying to force their views on people

You say you don't agree with his politics, but famb, you are acting just how Rogan wishes left-wing people to act.

As dismayed as I am by the fact that millions of people enjoy this content
banning these people doesn't make it go away.

I never claimed that it did. Bad ideas exist and it is people's responsibility to challenge them

But if you are gonna stand on the principle that you hate what elites are doing, and go on and on and on and on about it

But then when it comes to people like Rogan, the most you can muster is "It is bad, I wish they didn't do it"

Behavior like that really undercuts your claim that you are taking issue on principle

Clearly some things bother you more than others

suppression just leads to a lot of negative unintended consequences.

Yeah ok. The future is unknown

It is clear you think the line should be drawn somewhere. And the debate is where

But it is clear you were wrong about how innocuous is, you agree about bad it is, but at every step along the way, the problem you have taken is how people take issue with this elite, conspiracy theory pushing racist with a massive audience.

Sorry, but there is hard for me to see what you doing coming from a place of principled objection.

 

[masagipatron]

I don’t know what to think about all of this. He’s a comic, of the variety that say offensive things from time to time. However, he’s also more than a comic. He interviews important people and has influence. He took that Spotify deal, made headlines with that $100 million. He’s going to have to deal with this fallout. It’s the price of admission. He knew those old episodes were wild. I bet they pulled a ton of Joey Diaz material, Old Uncle Joey was a maniac, c***suckas. Spotify knew too. One thing I am a bit sickened by is all of these comics on social media acting like Joe got a terminal illness diagnosis. “I stand with Joe”. C’mon, B. He’ll be alright. Even if he loses his show, he’s straight.

 

[smedroc]

Dwayne Johnson walks back Joe Rogan support, 'educated to his complete narrative' after N-word video

It can’t be a good thing for Joe Rogan that he’s lost the public support of one of Hollywood’s biggest stars.

mmajunkie.usatoday.com

Rock aint trying to get too attached to Joe. he got movies and tequila to sell

I heard twitter started pulling receipts on the Rock from his WWE days in response to his statement

 

[gry60]

im confused

So the principle is NO misinformation

UNLESS
an elite actor that you like, in their infinite wisdom
has decided that the public is simply too stupid to handle the information?



you don't see how problematic this is?

and I think it's this kind of attitude that has caused many public health officials
to perform so poorly during this pandemic.

There was nothing confusing about what I said.

You make a determination about the steps to take based on the information at hand today, then you inform the public of your decision.

If after your statement is released, new information comes in that forces you to alter said statement, you make a new determination and release a new statement. I cannot accuse you of misinformation because you didn't know that new evidence was going to make your old statement entirely or partially invalid.

This is an application of the scientific method in real time. It has nothing do with "the elites I like," it has to do with the experts I trust, and I trust them because they know their **** better than most on the subject of epidemics, virology, crisis management, etc... They could have had better communicators.

the public is simply too stupid to handle the information

How many answers can you get when you talk about your car engine light in the office? Do you act on all the suggestions, or do you take your car to a mechanic?

The general public is generally ignorant of the methods and tools used to handle raw information. They are the most unreliable entity to go to in times of crisis. They were stocking up on toilet paper in the early days of the pandemic!

 

[trynafeelmink]

The long winded explanations for this are hilarious, whether he's reciting in this or not we know what it is with dude

They are beyond the pale many of those people, beyond the pale,” Biden continued. “And it’s a sad commentary on society. We have no choice but to take them out of society.”

Biden described a “cadre of young people, tens of thousands of them, born out of wedlock, without parents, without supervision, without any structure, without any conscience developing because they literally … because they literally have not been socialized, they literally have not had an opportunity.”

Totally not a guy who uses the N word

 

[Methodical Management]

it's far easier to discover content on the open web
than it is locked into a premium streaming apps.

Then why is his show's popularity increasing while being featured and promoted on Spotify instead of decreasing?

You're obviously just making this up as you go. You said the boycotts weren't going to matter and yet they've already pulled over 100 episodes and counting.
So now, even if we take your argument at full face value, Rogan's greatest hits of racism are "locked into a premium streaming app" that will no longer stream them.

I guess it mattered after all.

because it allows people to cosplay as fighting white supremacy while doing nothing actually substantive.
and further instantiates a culture around speech and expression, that makes it harder to produce compelling art. (something ill admit i care about much more than most people)

Okay, so now we're getting into your actual grievance: a certain type of White progressive. That's all fine and well, but the problem is you then generalize this grievance to anything a person in this category might potentially support, which is ridiculous.

Not only has it gotten you so turned around that your "culture war" positions tend to align with Laura Ingraham's, but you're also acting as though White progressives are the leaders on all such issues, instead of cheerleaders. It's the equivalent of believing that Elvis Presley invented rock and roll.

None of this is new. The Gen-Z activists you're shooing off your lawn weren't responsible for getting Don Imus fired. Joe Rogan's racism has been eminently well documented for a long, long time. Now some White celebrities are suddenly "Columbus discovering" them, and you're acting like they're the only ones who ever had a problem with it. Neil Young didn't even mention Rogan's racism in his initial statement. He took issue with the vaccine misinformation. India Arie seized the opportunity to build momentum around this issue and bring renewed focus on Rogan's racism, but you just lump her into the same category and belittle what she has now successfully accomplished because you have this kneejerk revulsion to anything that you associate with this certain type of performative White activism. You're using them as a cudgel against her, and everyone else who has a legitimate and personal stake in this.

If Billie Eilish joined the Freedom Riders, you'd be defending Bull Connor.

I agree its not the same,
the point im making is progressive have argued for a long time the publish-platform thing
is a way to avoid accountability.

and it if someone assembled of supercut of the worst NT posts,
that express racists sexist opinions and tried to use that as a pretext to shut down NT.

and you respond with "well im a platform not a publisher"
Im sure they would say the same thing to you they say to Zuck, the Twitter guy ect
you're using that as a cover to escape accountability.

You already conceded the point that sharing a platform with Trick Daddy isn't the same as doing business with a company that whose exclusive flagship podcast has at least a hundred episodes containing racist content.
It was a tangential strawman argument to begin with, you admitted it, and now you're for some reason still trying to mount this argument from beyond the grave, while tying me to a position I've repeatedly and explicitly argued against.

You're acting in bad faith.


Our dissatisfaction with the lack of responsibility borne by unmoderated or under-moderated platforms is literally the reason NikeTalk exists.

You're trying really hard to sell me on this weird fantasy where I will someday need you and Mike Cernovic to save me from the “woke mob,” as if that wouldn't be my rock bottom wake up call that I'd really screwed up in life.

Fox News does this, in a far more effective and mass scale way.
Sinclair does this.
Ben Shapiro does this.

So if a company you worked with became their biggest sponsor, you'd just shut up and dribble, so as not to be confused with a Gen Z White progressive?


Hate for profit is not a strictly symbolic "culture war" issue. You know this, because you understand the impact of White Nationalist propaganda outlets like Fox News.

Rogan is hardly an aggrieved underdog, and none of this is restricting Rogan's rights. It's countering speech with speech, and corporate financing with consumer spending. There is no "anti-CTE bill" circulating around Democratic statehouses designed to ban Joe Rogan from the Internet.



You don't get to have it both ways. If you believe that private companies, including service providers and platforms, have the right to moderate user/partner content, then your issue is where the line should be drawn – not over whether a line should be drawn at all.

If you believe the line should be drawn somewhere else, show your work and explain why limiting that content won't result in the same unspecified future risks as speaking out against Spotify's massive sponsorship of Joe Rogan.

And if you like our moderation policies, it's worth noting that they explicitly disallow the very content in question.